Furthermore, and this I will say, your whole attitude has stunk right from the beginning. You criticised my decision to run the games anonymously and even sent me PMs demanding to know the others involved. Now you want to criticse me here because I haven't immediately done as you said. I'm well within my rights to let other people have their say and discuss this to the full before ending what has otherwise been an excellent set of high-quality games.

Lastly, If you can't hold a reasonable conversation with 6 other players without resorting to insult to try and have your way, for which there clearly is no majority in favour yet, then I think it's best that if we do restart you remove yourself from the competition.

First of all, if one sentence of one of my posts (which really was just mirroring your previous "calling out" of Babak for being like a politician) can cause you to have what can only be described as a four post meltdown, I can only assume you are having a bad day.

I have no problem with you refusing to cancel; I'm just asking that you don't pretend that you are going with the majority in the decision. In one of the games, you are the only holdout. In every game at least 5 of the other 6 players have voted for a cancel, including the Czech and Frank, both of whom belong at most in a "don't care" category, leaving 3 for the cancel, 2 who don't really care, and 1 wants to cancel one of the games but not the other two.

I'm going to let the pregame thing go... As you know, the only concern I expressed was the fact that you got to know the full list of players in the game when no one else did, which I still think was unfair (it doesn't matter any more since we now know everyone's identity, which I think was one of Babak's complaints).

As far as your insinuation that I'm trying to cancel the games because I may be doing badly: 1. I wouldn't do that. Despite the pretty large increase in "forum diploming" that has seemed to be trendy lately, I think game matters stay in-game. I really do. I'm probably going to write an EOG about it for a game I'm about to finish, actually. 2. I'm not doing too badly. I likely will have 1 positive result and 2 negative ones, which, although not ideal, certainly isn't bad enough to go to extreme measures for (it is just a game after all).

My comment about Babak being politician-like was clearly good-humoured. Your comments were antagonistic and you continue to be. I am not going to respond to any of your other comments.

@To all: In this thread, only Babak and uclabb have come out strongly in favour of cancelling - with both saying they would continue if most others would prefer to continue. I have already said that I am not counting the current in-game votes for draw and cancel because I would prefer for us to reach a decision here, where we can actually discuss how to proceed - as such, I will ignore any more comments pushing on this issue.

I very quickly got a replacement for these games and now they are back on track. Rather than have any more rambling discussions please can all 7 players please just vote here whether they want to "continue" or "cancel". That seems the fairest way I can offer to proceed.

*Sorry, (argh!) (before the trolls lynch me), I meant to add Gobba along with Babak and uclabb.

Continue.

I would like to add that the Second Series of the Gunboat Games has had the same problems, with The Czech acting as replacement, but has proceeded smoothly without any complaints:
gameID=74008
gameID=74009
gameID=74010

Cancel.

Sarg. I must say, though I think on most occasions I've come to agree with you and have found you to be fair, on this occasion, I do not think you are being fair.

The Czech (who I presume is the replacement right?) really should not have a say (no offense Czech) as he is obviously picking up the 3 positions knowing what they are and how he's doing. This really should be among the 6 original players.

Frank was also clear... I quote: "I will vote unpause. I also will vote cancel. I personally am happy to keep going but I understand why some players might feel that the disruptions have ruined the games. "

To me, that sounds like he's willing to respect his fellow players' honest sense that these games are 'ruined' for them.


Let me be crystal clear Sarg. My feeling is that this series which was billed as a competitive top-notch series with top-notch competition (I wish I still had your PM) is no longer the 'great' set of games they were intended to be. They no longer hold the value they had when the 6 people you invited/accepted expected of them.

In the end, whatever. I've played my fair share of cruddy games, gunboat and non gunboat. I've had my fair share of good and bad results - and none of these matter... I can finish another three cruddy games and move on with my life. The point I'm making is that this series was billed as something specific which is what prompted ME to join despite having 7 other games. These games are no longer 'that' thing for which we signed up.

With that in mind, I think you are also not being completely fair when you say you won't accept the 'cancel' votes from in-game, and you also don't accept the specifics of Frank's words... which was a recognition that there are legitimate reasons to want to cancel this series... a recognition of opinions you have chosen not to extend yourself.


Oh and its also annoying that I can't get rid of the damn envelope even when I'm finalized. Anyone know how I can actually get rid of that envelope?

Babak when the game is over I think the envelope disappears. Yes, I am the replacement and voted cancel so the will of the majority can be honored. I took over the position as a favor to Sargmacher but am willing to do what the group wishes.

Babak, part of the issue is that you joined the games based on different information than the rest of us. I just wanted to play three games and if they get canceled I will be less the games and not able to join new ones until after the Holidays.

I will vote cancel since you clearly have no interest in playing. However, I think you should take into account what you are asking us to do and not think about this as your great hardship. Everyone ahs reasons for preferring one to the other, and a compromise is impossible since the outcomes are neither all or nothing.

Quoting Babak: "Frank was also clear... I quote: "I will vote unpause. I also will vote cancel. I personally am happy to keep going but I understand why some players might feel that the disruptions have ruined the games. "
To me, that sounds like he's willing to respect his fellow players' honest sense that these games are 'ruined' for them. [...] think you are also not being completely fair when you say you won't accept the 'cancel' votes from in-game, and you also don't accept the specifics of Frank's words... "

I think this is extremely unfair.

Firstly, I have not misrepresented the specifics of Frank's words - he quite clearly says he is happy to keep going. Yes he understand your pain and frustration but he is happy to keep going. I didn't once misrepresent that - I counted Frank down as someone who wanted to 'continue' because I felt that was the emphasis of his message here - and I said as much in a message directly after his comment and he posted back on here with a friendly quip about Jimbozig - there was no adamant objection to me including him in the list of players who wanted to cancel.

Secondly, to say that I have not recognised your opinion on this is wrong. If you have read my comments on this thread, I don't know how you could have this point of view. I will quote my comments made above for your benefit:

"I appreciate this is extremely annoying. My preference would be to find an upstanding replacement player as quickly as possible and continue. However, I understand why people might not want to for reasons of heavy disruption"
"If a majority of the players want to cancel the series, then I will happily vote to cancel. If, on the other hand, people accept my apologies for this unforeseen and uncontrollable disruption"
"@Babak: Thanks for your message here and in private - I appreciate what you've said and your support. "

Thirdly, to explain again on your point that "I think you are also not being completely fair when you say you won't accept the 'cancel' votes from in-game"

I will of course vote to cancel if that is what the majority wants - I have explicitly stated this more than once before. All I wanted was to have a reasonable discussion about how to proceed on the forum so we could have some clarity. If we did not have a discussion at all then we would not even be in this position and the game might be continuing unresolved. I really really don't see why I should be attacked for wanting to resolves things through talking first rather than agreeing to the demands of those who would rather just have everyone rush in and vote in-game without discussion. Numerous people have also voted in-game for a draw - clearly there are discrepancies in the in-game voting system which is exactly the reason why I wanted us to talk about it and not base everything on the in-game vote. I wanted us to have clarity before we all hit cancel - this does not make me the kind of Gaddafi-like unfair person I'm being made out to be.

As for Lando's comment that "part of the issue is that [Babak] joined the games based on different information than the rest of us."

How can you actually know if that statement is true? Have you seen any of the correspondence I had with Babak? No. I did not advertise the games differently to various members of the group - I billed them as a high quality set of gunboat tournament-style games where players would take part in multiple simultaneous games in varying series.

That said, I'm going to vote cancel because I have no stomach to carry this any further. All I wanted to do is create a fun set of high-quality games without the subscription and beauracracy of a fully-fledged tournament. I have tried to express my apologies for all the problems that have happened. I have tried to express that I wanted to proceed in the fairest way possible. I'm sorry that this has not been possible and that my best efforts have led to this - which is of course not what I wanted.

Babak, thanks for at least making your criticisms constructive and I hope you can understand the reasons I have presented to you on what I have said and the actions I took.

Last call then, I will vote cancel as well sometime tonight.

I want to play. If anyone else wants to play say so now.

i have no idea what this is about, but if you still need a replacement player, I'm your man.

Lando, it's clear only you, Frank, and I want to continue playing. That doesn't give uclabb, Babak, and Gobba, a majority but I'm tired of the petty complaining and personal attacks. I would like to restart this Series at some point and don't want it held to ransom any longer. Just let it go.

Thanks bas - I'm going to restart the Series if you're interested?

Well, one of them is still missing a vote lol

I'll play!

I will definitely play in a restart. Thanks for organizing all of this, Sarg.

It's funny the way that Uclabb and Babak didn't feel the need to cancel this game: gameID=73678

Sarg - I feel compelled to make several points here.

1) Thank you. Thank you for organizing the series of games. Thank you for doing your best to keep them going when unforeseen circumstances did pop up. and thank you for being (in my eyes) mostly fair both here in this thread in the other conversations I've see you participate in. None of the other comments take away from the positive force of your personality or your great job putting together good folks for good games, a few of which I've been able to participate in before.

2) This thread and this conversation were started in good faith. I recognize that and know that in your eyes and in your mind you did your best. I will agree that you do not deserve any insults thrown your way, but I would also submit that you were NOT subjected to any. The mild criticism regarding 'fairness' were far short of any abrasive language or hurtful intent directed your way. I suggest you go back and re-read uclabb and my comments on this thread with a new perspective. Put yourself in the shoes of an independent observer not in the game and I do not think you will see them as at all insulting. There was a difference of opinion and some criticism, but certainly no personal insults. At least that is my perspective, uclabb can speak for himself.

3) Regarding the 'discrepancy' at the game start. I do not agree with Lando here. I think we were all under the impression that we are entering a high-quality gunboat game being set up by someone with a track-record of getting good games together. The game did function as intended and win or lose, doing well or poor, There were no complaints from the participants. When PE left due to circumstances, I think he did as good a job as he could have done to find a replacement for himself. It was certainly not ideal to reveal who he was in-game, but the little it disturbed the game was not a big deal. Then came the ejection of mr. crispy. Here is where things broke down - again, not your fault. First, no one (except you I guess) knew that mr. crispy was replacing PE. I thought he was there from the start. second, the sudden forced pause caused a rukkus and the ensuing conversation revealed a lot about the game and the players. Accepting that at this point, the games were tarnished, certainly not due to any action or inaction on you part, is the difference of opinion that existed here. So the discrepancy was really between the game we were playing today versus what we started playing.

4) You referenced the World-Dip game. You know full well this as an apples to oranges comparison. One is an anon-gunboat series, the other is a non-anon 48hr World game. one had to replace twice, in complete anonymity, and without input, the other had a thread dedicated to signing up the players and has 5 players on a waitlist all *pledged* to finalize orders etc. I really do not know what comparison you were trying to draw. Unless you were or are trying to insinuate something else which escapes me.

5) Thank you. Thank you to both you and Lando for accepting the cancel. I know it was annoying for you both, but speaking for myself, it was annoying for me NOT to cancel. I have enjoyed playing with you both... and I look forward to many games where we can play together again. If you have not changed your mind about me personally, I'd also love to play in the re-start of this series - be it now or in January.


In the end, I'm sorry you seem distraught by this thread, but you should know you are highly respected on the site, no one intentionally insulted you or questioned your morality as a whole (even if they or I criticized one particular judgement here). I do hope you change your mind and do not think about leaving the site or the games you are in, this community would be worst off without you.

half of us wanted to play half of us didn't, someone had to lose out. unfortunate but the way it was.

I wanted to cancel. :-)

As Babak said, I wasn't trying to troll or get you riled up. I was only trying to express that, from my point of view, you were trying to balance the appearance of being a fair game-organizer with your actual wish to keep the games going. And this is really what you should have been doing, so I wasn't even trying to be overly critical. I simply wanted you to come out and vote for a continue rather than try to say that you were going with the majority. And, I admit, this (what I see as in some way taking the communication style used in-game and putting it out on the forums) is something that I have been hyper-sensitive to recently, as I said before, because of events not at all related to these games. Further, it seems like there is something about my writing style that gets your blood boiling (unintentionally), so I probably have something that needs to be fixed about my style (being a math major has not done wonders for my writing ability).

As far as the world game that you linked, I have no idea what your complaint it. If you are more clear, I can respond.